A citizens group, the City of Renton and a King County Library System renovation team have yet to see what a state hearing examiner makes of an appeal and site plan review before him.

Phil Oblrechts, the hearing examiner, has given the group Save the Cedar River Library…Again! until Aug. 6 to make the case that there is a lack of cultural and historical mitigation plans in the environmental review for the downtown Renton library.

Tuesday, Olbrechts presided over a public hearing for both the appeal and the site plan review and a permit related to shoreline work. The appeal portion of the hearing took most of the day, with entire hearing running from 10 a.m. to nearly 3 p.m.

After the citizens group’s submission, the City of Renton has two days to submit a reply, after which time the hearing examiner can make a determination. He has 10 days to decide.

Olbrechts heard in-person testimony in council chambers by members of the citizens group and local residents. Personal experiences with the library over the Cedar River were offered as well as expert testimony.

Dennis Ossenkop spoke as a 40-year Renton resident and a retired Federal Aviation Administration staffer, familiar with the Environmental Protection Act permitting process. Paul Ouellette gave testimony, too, as a long-time resident and family man, who’s used the library and park complex. Ouellette called himself an expert witness, based on his background as an engineering consultant and presented technical concerns about the renovation plans. Nicola Robinson, who filed the appeal with David Keyes and Beth Asher, read a letter said to be from David Arthur Johnston, the only surviving architect of the library built in 1975.

The hearing examiner was also given written testimony from residents and some correspondence, such as letters from the state Department of Archeology and Historical Preservation. Olbrechts even allowed DVDs of a March 19 KCLS Board of Trustees’ meeting, depicting outcry from Renton residents. Senior Assistant City Attorney Garmon Newsom II objected to the video submissions, then withdrew the objection after Olbrechts explained his allowance. The hearing examiner said the videos could be exhibits in the official record based on the cultural relevance issue of the appeal.

“I have a lot of work ahead of me,” the hearing examiner said, in his closing statements.

He has always been aware of Renton’s “distinctive” Cedar River Library, having grown up in Bellevue, Olbrechts told the audience. He recognized that the building isn’t yet listed as an historic site, but gave indication that perhaps that distinction could be included with the environmental policies around the renovation, with further investigation into national policies around preservation.

The building is important, Olbrechts said, but asked if the entrance is historically and culturally significant.

That question and a 400-square-foot wedge on the pedestrian bridge were the main points of contention throughout the day. The citizens group argued the use and function of the current entry way and access points are historically and culturally relevant. The KCLS and City of Renton project team countered, claiming nothing about the library has been “degraded.”

Kayren Kittrick, city development engineering supervisor, used that term to rebut claims the City of Renton did not study traffic and pedestrian use pattern for the library and former city hall campus. According to Kittrick, the circulation and access is continually evaluated by Renton traffic engineers.

A traffic study was not required for the library project based on the “use of trips,” she said.

“It will be rush in and rush out, gone will be the place where people stop and gaze out,” said Richard Bray, Renton resident, in his testimony.

Bray was one of many who explained the cultural and historical relevance of the current main entry of the library on the bridge deck, as he sees it.

Vanessa Dolbee, Renton senior planner, had very little to add in closing statements for the city. After presenting the summary of the project for the site plan review and answering most appeal questions, she said the city has made its position clear in writing.

Miller Hull project architect Ruth Baleiko offered similar comments after the hearing.

“Our submittal, like Vanessa said, is on the record,” Baleiko said. “And I think it’s really up to the hearing examiner to make whatever decisions are appropriate.”

Everything presented in the public hearing does not change the design team’s approach during the interim, while they wait for the hearing examiner’s determination, according to the architect.

When asked if the citizens group got out all their arguments in the hearing, David Keyes said the group would be reviewing its primary arguments. Keyes stated that he has to be “circumspect” about answering media questions now.

“We think that it’s very important that the SEPA application and determination of non-significance or significance, or asking for more information all be done carefully,” Keyes said. “So that, these later steps, like shoreline (permitting), can be done appropriately.”

The detailing of cultural and historical relevance of the project is crucial, Keyes said, because the shoreline permit suggests that all involved state agencies and public groups study that relevance and give “coherent answers in the SEPA checklist.”

“In the application for shoreline (permit), KCLS blew that away and the city – for whatever reason – didn’t give it the consideration, we think they needed to,” Keyes said. “They didn’t challenge it.”